Democrats Want To Turn Foley Into A Campaign Issue

The Democrats want to turn the whole Foley mess into a campaign issue, which isn’t surprising given that the last few weeks of intensive debate over national security and the war on terror has resulted in resurgent approval numbers for both Republicans and President Bush.
The problem is that in order to turn this into a campaign issue the Democrats, assisted as always by their allies in the media, must draw the Republican party in general into the scandal. Which is exactly what they’re doing, or at least trying to do, with these insinuations about Republican House leadership trying to cover-up Foley’s escapades with this kid.
The thing is, though, that the Republican House leadership didn’t have anything to cover up. At least not according to the information we have now.
Rep. Tom Reynolds has said that he told Hastert of the communications between Foley and the boy last year, which makes it sound like Hastert learned of Foley’s inappropriate actions but let it slide. In reality, though, Hastert got a much different picture of what was going on than what we have now.
From the New York Times:

Aides to the speaker and other Congressional Republican leaders said that the messages brought to their attention — described as “over friendly” — were much less explicit than others that came to light after ABC News disclosed the first e-mail correspondence. In those messages, Mr. Foley asked about the well-being of the boy, a Monroe, La., resident, after Hurricane Katrina and requested a photograph.
He wrote: “How are you weathering the hurricane. . .are you safe. . .send me a pic of you as well.”…
“No one in the speaker’s office was made aware of the sexually explicit text messages which press reports suggest had been directed to another individual until they were revealed in the press and on the Internet this week,” the statement from Mr. Hastert’s office said.

Let me remind everyone that charging someone with having inappropriate relations with a child (albeit a child who is legally able to consent to sex under the laws of Washington D.C.) is probably, short of accusing them of rape or murder, one of the most serious accusations you can make against someone. You do not make that accusation, and ruin their life and career, unless it is based on sound evidence. Hastert clearly, according to the reporting above, did not have that information.
Further, the action Hastert did take upon originally learning of the situation seems entirely appropriate to me:
Again, from the New York Times: